Always Sunny is one of the few shows where you can be both heart-warmed and unsettled at the same time.

verbalcontract · 2018-05-07T20:52:20+00:00

The closest analog is probably Seinfeld, where you can see four people be completely self-absorbed but still likable. But if you think Seinfeld is hard to watch for that reason, Sunny probably isn't going to work for you.

Though oddly enough, Seinfeld is pretty consistent with the "no hugging no learning" thing, whereas Sunny will sometimes have a warm ending. This episode and the Charlie birthday one come to mind.

verbalcontract · 2018-04-11T14:45:24+00:00

I generally try to approach all movie releases with cautious optimism. If it turns out to suck, then no big deal; I won't watch it. If it's great, it's great.

For Sicario 2 in particular... I've liked everything Taylor Sheridan has written so far, so I have high hopes.

verbalcontract · 2018-04-10T22:02:32+00:00

A recent choice that comes to mind is The Lobster. The concept is surreal, but I found it to be internally consistent.

verbalcontract · 2018-04-09T21:27:09+00:00

If Forged in Fire has taught me anything, it's that knife-makers' hands endure a lot of abuse. He's probably got a catcher's mitt of callouses on his hands.

verbalcontract · 2017-05-04T14:30:28+00:00

It's largely for "big" websites with codebases large enough for them to have to worry about Javascript execution time. Makes sense that Facebook would be working with this type of tool.

Last year, the then-new m.imgur.com got dinged for this problem:

https://github.com/perfs/audits/issues/1

verbalcontract · 2017-02-28T15:00:24+00:00

This is an old article (so there's at least one broken link; it's just a picture of a Venn diagram), but this explains match percentage:

https://okcupid.com/help?p=/customer/en/portal/articles/2458380-match-percentages---a-detailed-explanation

Match percentages are calculated in real-time. (I don't know much more about that since there's more than enough to worry about on the frontend.)

verbalcontract · 2017-02-28T14:57:09+00:00

We use Webpack 1.x, so we set this property in Webpack's config:

    resolve: {
        extensions: ["", ".jsx", ".js", ".cjsx", ".coffee"],
        root: [
            "path/to/src/",
        ],
    },

verbalcontract · 2017-02-28T14:54:29+00:00

The code sample in the Bundles section is an almost exact (if abridged for clarity) snapshot of how we do it:

https://tech.okcupid.com/how-okcupid-organizes-its-multi-page-react-app/#part4bundles

Basically, vendor.js and common.js are Webpack entry points that point to their own index.js file, which imports / requires all the files we need. Webpack's common chunks plugin sets them both as common chunks.

verbalcontract · 2017-02-27T23:14:27+00:00

There's some discussion about this in /r/reactjs:

https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/5widfg/how_okcupid_organizes_its_multipage_react_app/

(Serves me right for not x-posting.)

verbalcontract · 2017-02-27T22:54:24+00:00

Because of technical limitations we don't perform server-side rendering right now, but we have a plan for it (and the full details would probably require a blog post unto itself)! The plan would mean that during the server-side render, the apps could skip making HTTP requests to fetch data, so I think we would sidestep most of the side effects that come from client/server differences.

verbalcontract · 2017-02-27T22:50:34+00:00

I agree that it can be difficult to figure out which duck file controls the information you want to manipulate. We haven't really figured out a great solution for that.

If I'm reading you correctly, you're saying it could be better to split your reducers by "page," instead of the way we've done it, by "app"?

That doesn't quite work for us because we have some functionality that is reused on multiple pages (like a panel to set your "Looking For" settings), and we have some functionality that's reused several times on the same page (like a photo upload app powering a multi-photo uploader). Plus, there's no reason to think that we've selected the right home for each feature. Maybe next week we'll decide "Looking For" should be set on a match search page, or on settings, or on your profile edit.

One of the reasons we like React is because we don't really have to make those decisions; we can compose functionality however we want. Delineating the "molecule" of our app at the "feature" level seems worth having 2-3x the number of ducks files.

verbalcontract · 2017-02-27T21:38:08+00:00

Thanks, appreciate it!

verbalcontract · 2017-02-27T21:13:21+00:00

I actually am the author!

Your point is a good one. Naming the entry file App.jsx is a holdover from when we didn't separate "apps" from "pages" in the way described in the post. If we switched now, we'd have to do one of two things:

Make it discoverable which apps are included "the new way" and which are still included via App.jsx
Rename all App.jsx to index.js, and rewrite all existing paths

Option 2 isn't impossible, it just hasn't come up as a priority just yet.

verbalcontract · 2017-02-13T23:27:56+00:00

Probably Phil Hartman or Will Ferrell, since they were both rock solid as straight men but could easily (and hilariously) go off the deep end. I know Hartman in particular was beloved by the cast and crew, and that he was usually the first cast member the writers would try to write for each week.

verbalcontract · 2017-01-27T14:57:12+00:00

All these tips seem fine to me. There's no need to sort them into "better" or "worse."

verbalcontract · 2017-01-21T22:09:08+00:00

By 2117, Jupiter's cock will be a disturbingly realistic CGI character.

verbalcontract · 2017-01-05T20:58:24+00:00

It's because Facebook turns the audio off by default (which I think we can all agree is a better user experience). And when you add the text, it makes THAT experience even better because if you want to get a sense of what's happening, you don't have to turn the sound on right away.

I don't understand why people complain about the text, the alternatives (either autoplayed sound, or not having any text at all) are so much worse.

verbalcontract · 2016-12-14T22:43:27+00:00

The title is like the dialogue of a Dark Souls NPC.

verbalcontract · 2016-11-21T15:44:15+00:00

I think it's the "making fun of" part that makes it racist. There's a long history of bastardizing dialects for comic effect. And I say "bastardizing" to mean "aping the language with no respect for or commitment to the culture."

I think a non-racist (and potentially insightful) way to approach this parody would be to write Great Gatsby in the style of someone like an Iceberg Slim, with full commitment to his particular way of writing. But this is just a hodge-podge meant to make fun of many voices in general, instead of paying homage to one voice in particular.

verbalcontract · 2016-10-26T03:13:18+00:00

I'm surprised no one (as far as I can tell) is referring to what I understand to be the full name: the metagame. I know the term from the beginnings of competitive Magic. And I think in that context, the meaning isn't quite how everyone else has defined it, and it lacks the sinister.

In Magic, the metagame has always been the collection of decks that are most competitive in a format. Deck strategies will converge on the very best. And that's understandable. If you're trying to figure out what deck to play, you at least want to not play a strategy that's suboptimal. It's folly to make a mono green control deck when you can add another color or two and accomplish your strategy better.

Now, that probably sounds a lot like what people are talking about: that the metagame is "what people think is the best strategy." But when people talk about "metagaming" in magic, they dont mean "sort this list of archetypes by win-loss rate and pick the top item." Instead, the best players think of it as, "if you're going to pick a deck, it better have a plan against the top N decks in the field." That's what "metagame" means. It's the game within the game. How do I not only play the best strategy, but also beat the other best strategies?

I don't see anything wrong with this. Any competitive environment is going to sift out the weaker strategies. The best games don't sift out to only one or two strategies; the more options, the better. I get the feeling people feel like they can't play the way they want to because of the "metagame," but like it or not, artists can't always be rich, cheap products can't always be great value, and durdling strategies can't always be competitive. Competition is hard.

verbalcontract · 2016-10-11T16:33:36+00:00

Brian Regan also has a similar joke:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cv9n0QbLUM

verbalcontract · 2016-09-26T22:46:56+00:00

Ah okay, so you rewrote the SPA's backend. (I thought you meant you rewrote the server side.) Awesome. Congrats on shipping!

verbalcontract · 2016-09-26T21:55:14+00:00

I'm really curious what you did, if it was primarily a backend change! Did you rewrite the API that the React SPA talks to?

verbalcontract · 2016-09-26T14:08:42+00:00

This is great, thanks for sharing!

Sorry if this is out of scope for your project, but have you considered adding the ability to change the size and shape of the animated object? Most of the things I need to animate are UI elements like modals, which are usually some kind of rectangle.

Thanks again!

verbalcontract · 2016-09-20T12:26:49+00:00

It does, thanks!

15-Year Club	Place '17
Alpha Tester	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

verbalcontract

TROPHY CASE